Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Creationist Deception
Topic Started: May 20 2009, 09:21 PM (684 Views)
Deleted User
Deleted User

Came across the perfect example of Creationist deeption.

Today's headlines announce 47-million-year-old primate fossil unveiled:
Quote:
 
Scientists on Tuesday unveiled fossilized remains of one of the oldest and most complete skeletons of an early primate, a finding they say could further our understanding of what our own ancestors might have looked like.

The now-extinct primate lived on the earth some 47 million years ago in the Eocene period.

The creature, nicknamed Ida after University of Oslo researcher Jorn Hurum's six-year-old daughter, was a female with four legs and a tail. It appears to be about nine or 10 months of age and was just under 60 centimetres from its head to the tip of its tail, the scientists said.

It is not a direct ancestor to humans or monkeys, but it did share some characteristics with higher primates worth examining, they said.

The primate, called Darwinius masillae, died at the margin of a volcanic lake in a rain forest in a region about 20 kilometres south of modern-day Frankfurt, Germany, near the town of Messel....
The story goes on to report the arguments scientists are having over the find.

OK, now here is a creationist distorting the story: Another missing link or another red herring?:
Quote:
 
The missing link has been found! Or so the scientists will tell you once again. They have this monkey that they claim is 45 million years old. Without getting into the creation debate all over again, I just want to say, really 45 million years huh? They had monkeys back then?...
More ranting and raving and deception follows.

Scientists have not claimed to have found the missing link. It is not a certain 45 million years old but an uncertain "some 47 million years"--even the numbers are wrong. And it is not claimed to be a monkey, in fact not even claimed to be an ancestor of a monkey.

Unbelievable how deceptive creationist arguments are. Bold faced lies they are. Why would someone, supposedly with God on their side, need to lie like that?


Scientists hail stunning fossil has a video of the find.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Goto http://www.google.com/

It's got fundies' undies in a knot.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
ngc1514
Member Avatar
Moderator
[ * ]
I saw it earlier today, Chris. It's good to keep the fundies in a funk.

I've noticed that breezy - or any of the fundy creationists - never answer the question of why there are ANY early man fossils. Oh, they gripe about only a few, but, by what reasoning do they come up with swallowing the fact that there ARE any at all?

It would seem the existence of these fossils is a major monkey wrench in the as-yet-unstated Theory of Creation. Maybe not even a monkey wrench - perhaps a prosimian wrench....
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Oh but the fossils were placed there by God to test their faith. God is tricky that way.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
ngc1514
Member Avatar
Moderator
[ * ]
Which makes god into the Deceiver and we all know the Deceiver is actually Satan. So.. are god and Satan one?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

God created everything, they say, He's the first cause, the unmoved mover.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

More on this: Creationists freak out over Darwinius
Quote:
 
How are the creationists reacting to the discovery of Darwinius masillae? With denial and outrage, of course, but one thing that is an interesting datum is that they are all responding to the extravagant hype surrounding it. The fossil is important and has a significant place in the evolutionary record, but the way its purchasers and the media have described it with overblown rhetoric has actually damaged public perception. It's an interesting transitional form from an early point in the history of primates, and the sloppy media coverage had people expecting a revivified Fred Flintstone carrying a video camera that had been left running for 47 million years.

Rapture Ready is hilarious. They are deeply offended that Google used a doodle of Darwinius as their logo yesterday. It's a sign of the End Times (but then, everything is a sign of the coming rapture to those loons), it's actually the bones of the Nephilim, and besides, they never use Google anyway, because it's a liberal search engine. Rapture Ready is always a guaranteed source of insanity.

Ray Comfort focuses only on the hype. The news is reporting Darwinius masillae as the missing link that finally confirms evolution (a claim that all the scientists I know have laughed over), so therefore the evil Darwinists have been lying all this time when they say evolution has been long confirmed. Then he gets to have it both ways by finding a news report that advocates more caution in interpreting the fossil, so — a-HA! — the evilutionists don't have proof after all! It's typical Comfort-logic, that is, lunacy.

Answers in Genesis belittles the whole find. It's only an "extinct, lemur-like creature" that doesn't even look like a chimpanzee. They also focus on the hype that has annoyed so many of us, citing that horrible Sky News report that claimed "proof of this transitional species finally confirms Charles Darwin's theory of evolution" (how anyone could have written that phrase and still claim to be a science journalist is a bit of a mystery — it's so bad, it's not even wrong.) Oh, and its preservation is evidence of a global, catastrophic flood.

It's really too bad. The media provided a distorted image of the find, aided and abetted by a grandstanding scientist, and now we're going to hear creationists claiming for years that there wasn't any evidence for evolution before, and when we did come up with something, it was "just" a dead lemur.

Bad science reporting, even by journalists who seem to be sympathetic to evolution, is destructive to good science. There are about a dozen writers I can find with minimal effort and the assistance of that liberal search engine who need to be taken out to the woodshed. And a certain Dr Hurum has caused a self-inflicted wound to his own reputation, as well.


Actual story has links to creations comment.

PZ Myers, the author, is a fairly widely know critic of Creationism and ID.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
ngc1514
Member Avatar
Moderator
[ * ]
One of the reasons why I never read astronomy stories in the newspapers is that they NEVER get the details right. Oh, Walter Sullivan who wrote for the NY Times the whole time I was growing up in NYC, was a good, accurate writer who took care to get the details right.

Today's crop? Bleech.

The newspaper stories are just a place to find the topic of interest. For the meat... go to the web.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

The media tends to sensationalize everything.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
ngc1514
Member Avatar
Moderator
[ * ]
What a hoot! I'd not seen that Rapture Ready site before and it's hilarious!

We have a Rapture Index of 164 (as of May 18th) and that means we'd better be packing the china because it MIGHT happen at any moment.

Quote:
 
Rapture Index of 100 and Below: Slow prophetic activity
Rapture Index of 100 to 130: Moderate prophetic activity
Rapture Index of 130 to 160: Heavy prophetic activity
Rapture Index above 160: Fasten your seat belts


The record low was during Clinton's first term in office with a reading of 57 while the record high was a couple weeks after 9/11 with a 182. Not surprisingly, I didn't notice any change in the "prophetic activity" between those dates.

I'm wondering how they decided "Gog" is Russia. Might we suspect "Magog" is Mrs. Russia?

The site is a hoot!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · RV AND CAMPING DISCUSSION · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis